ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2021
Overall survival of patients with
Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond the Scan: Adapting Multimodal Lung Cancer Screening for Central and Eastern Europe-Overcoming Systemic Barriers and Epidemiological Confounders.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Primary renal parenchymal squamous cell carcinoma: a case report and literature review.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- Clinical applications of deep learning in distinguishing benign from malignant pulmonary nodules in computed tomography scans.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- Appraisal of lung cancer survival in patients with end-stage renal disease.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of the study was to estimate the overall survival of patients with MATERIAL AND
methodsReal-world patients who received afatinib, erlotinib or gefitinib between 1 July 2012 and 30 October 2017 were analysed in five subgroups.
resultsAmong 267 patients treated with afatinib financed as the first line of treatment, 76 (28.46%) deaths occurred. Median observation time was 12.8 months (95% CI: 11.2-13.9). Median OS was 22.8 months (95% CI: 19.2-27.1). Among 83 patients who received erlotinib financed exclusively as the second line of treatment the number of deaths was 74 (89.16%). Median observation time was 64.3 months (95% CI: 60.4-64.6). Median OS was 16 months (95% CI: 13.2-22.9). Among 622 patients who received erlotinib financed both as first and second line treatment, there were 400 (64.3%) deaths. Median observation time was 33.3 months (95% CI: 31.2-37.6). Median OS was 17.8 months (95% CI: 16.4-19.7). Among 137 patients who received gefitinib financed only as the first line of treatment, there were 128 (93.4%) deaths. Median observation time was 58.3 months (95% CI: 49.4-62.5). Median OS was 16 months (95% CI: 13.8-19.7). Among 348 patients who received gefitinib financed both as the first and second line of treatment the number of deaths was 208 (59.8%). Median observation time was 23.7 months (95% CI: 20.7-28.7). Median OS was 15.5 months (95% CI: 12.9-17.5).
conclusionsOur real-world data regarding OS confirm the benefits found in clinical trials from the use of afatinib, erlotinib or gefitinib. However, the lower overall survival rate of Polish patients compared to similar studies from other research centres suggests the need for deeper investigation of this issue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.